The New Grämlins

[King Chill I]

[quote name='KagetheSecond' date='02 April 2010 - 10:58 AM' timestamp='1270223868' post='2245416']
The tone of Chill's posts make it seem as though they won't be pursuing this anymore. Thats what I hope at least.
[/quote]

Oh dont count on me for any kind of reliable info. Im fairly inactive and mostly disinterested these days. I wanted to give some context on the whole Gre/Ram drama and the reason why the alliance has gone the path it has.

Oh and yea started saying that Gre should change its name since back in august.

[Crymson]

[quote name='kriekfreak' date='02 April 2010 - 05:41 AM' timestamp='1270208499' post='2245272']
I've bolded the parts that were absolutely ignorant or miss-informed at best. Crymson didn't saw his mistakes, he kept on making the same mistakes over and over again. How many allies of you did he alienate? Well at least [s]three[/s] four (FOK, Umbrella, Gramlins and Kronos). Nobody stopped his path of destruction while they had the chance. Only after all the harm was done did people (inside TOP) start doubting him. Hell, I've seen enough evidence to claim that the majority of TOP supported his actions while they took place. If this was cause Crymson was twisting the facts I don't know, but the end result remains the same. TOP supported Crymson's acts. And funny is that the times Crymson didn't discussed things with his allies, government, alliance members things were messed up.

Now, I'm not saying Ramirus is clear of fault, guild and much more. I've seen some very bad things from him aswell. Which is also the responsibility of the Gramlins members. They support him the same was as TOP supported Crymson.

I hope Gramlins will move away from their request of unconditional surrender since they were involved in this cause of their friends in MK (and in extension CnG). I think it's asinine to request stricter terms than the people you are in this for. And I hope this can end once and for all.
[/quote]

You seem to be oddly fixated on me, Arexes. You go out of your way and spend quite a bit of effort to criticize me whenever you have the opportunity. Is there something about trying to put me down that makes you feel better about yourself? It seems to go beyond simple CN dislike. Case in point: this post of yours. First, you're earnestly trying to compare me to Ramirus, a comparison which everyone knows is an utterly inane. Second, you're employing---and you're probably doing so knowingly---arguments on matters you really don't know any sufficient amount about in an effort to try to make said comparison. You yourself probably know that you're stretching to Mr. Fantastic proportions in your efforts to vilify me in this thread.

In any event, for you this thread very quickly became about me rather than about the situation at hand. What's up with that? Where does your unusual fixation on me come from? I mean, we've only ever spoken once in private, so surely you don't actually know me at all. Would you like to talk about it?

Edited April 2, 2010 by Crymson

[jstep]

[quote name='kriekfreak' date='02 April 2010 - 11:33 AM' timestamp='1270222362' post='2245383']
I'm an involved party in this matter.
[/quote]

Involved parties always have unbiased opinions

[Matt Miller]

[quote name='King Chill I' date='02 April 2010 - 10:18 AM' timestamp='1270217898' post='2245324']
Everyone here running around crying about Ram this Ram that should know that he is not exactly worshiped in Gre.
The main reason Ram got to the top is because he had/has very interesting and innovative ideas when it came to Gre and the politics of PB in general. Ideas that would make things more interesting and fun (as opposed to the current fake mtv girly drama). Most of us in Gre went along because it was something new, a challenge and a chance to do things differently. Sadly Ram has a great propensity of eventually messing up the process.
The whole unconditional surrender thing is an idea along these lines. [b]Its new, its interesting and its got all of your panties in a bunch.[/b] I dont think its gonna fly because usually the execution is far from being as good as the idea and because of Ram's inability to get others on board due to his curt methods. However, its still something different from the whole create-girly-drama-start-penis-contest-slap-each-other-engage-in-nerdy-"peace"-talks-recycle-repeat that everyone else is doing.
[b]
You can whine and !@#$%* about the evil gremlins but as long as Gre has good friends, can defend itself and is having fun trying out new things thats all that is gonna matter[/b].
[/quote]

Well it's certainly comforting knowing that there are 30 or so alliances still actually fighting and damaging each other greatly just so Gre can have some "fun" trying something "new." Perhaps you'll want to find a larger Petri dish for all of us to fit into for your little experiment.

I wonder how long till Ramirus realizes this is a non-starter and then decides to ask for like 20k in tech instead. He'll probably claim it's due to a longer war timeframe... as if Gre has taken any real damage for many weeks now.

[Crymson]

[quote name='KagetheSecond' date='02 April 2010 - 01:33 AM' timestamp='1270193583' post='2245186']
Going to agree here. The Kronos incident was EXTREMELY jerkish.
[/quote]

I won't argue with that. I was way out of line in how I behaved towards Kronos in that event, and I regret it; I had some unfortunate RL circumstances in play at the time, but I won't try to make excuses based on that.

However, it should be noted that there are some major misconceptions surrounding my involvement in that affair. I was [b]not[/b] in government at the time; I was in the presence of our MoFA throughout the entire matter; I did nothing without his consent; and he was the one who was making the decisions for TOP, not I.

That said, Kage, you should note that DictatorDan is calling me a jerk for criticizing his victim complex and for repeatedly kicking him from TOP's public channel

[kriekfreak]

[quote name='Crymson' date='02 April 2010 - 05:50 PM' timestamp='1270226991' post='2245457']
You seem to be oddly fixated on me, Arexes. You go out of your way and spend quite a bit of effort to criticize me whenever you have the opportunity. Is there something about trying to put me down that makes you feel better about yourself? It seems to go beyond simple CN dislike. Case in point: this post of yours. First, you're earnestly trying to compare me to Ramirus, a comparison which everyone knows is an utterly inane. Second, you're employing---and you're probably doing so knowingly---arguments on matters you really don't know any sufficient amount about in an effort to try to make said comparison. You yourself probably know that you're stretching to Mr. Fantastic proportions in your efforts to vilify me in this thread.

In any event, for you this thread very quickly became about me rather than about the situation at hand. What's up with that? Where does your unusual fixation on me come from? I mean, we've only ever spoken once in private, so surely you don't actually know me at all. Would you like to talk about it?
[/quote]

I'm not fixated about you, nor do I go out of my way and spent quite a bit effort to criticizing you. I comment on things I see that I feel are incorrect. Yes, you are mostly (not entirely) to blame why TOP is in this bad position right now. And that saddens me to a great extent. I've always felt that TOP was FOK's big brother that took care of FOK when it was still in the child stages. That feeling went away with all the !@#$ you pulled and distant TOP away from FOK. My dislike in you doesn't go beyond planet Bob. I can distinguish two separate realities and act on it, unlike other persons I know.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I'm comparing you with Ramirus. I'm not trying to compare you with Ramirus, I'm commenting on people that used that comparison to prove their points. Although I can see some similarities between you and Ramirus, just as I can see similarities between other leaders from other alliances. Why is that inane? I know enough (don't forget I have a lot of close friends in TOP and in the alliances you alienated). I'd say I'm more informed than the rank and vile of your own alliance. And probably have a much better and complete picture than most of the parties involved since I have several point of views.

I hardly have to vilify you in this thread, you did most of it yourself with your own actions even a blind man could see were wrong.

Edited April 2, 2010 by kriekfreak

[Diomede]

[quote name='Aimee Mann' date='02 April 2010 - 05:13 PM' timestamp='1270224817' post='2245425']
The current Gramlins aren't in here trying to rebrand themselves from what I can see, it seems to be the old guys and their supporters who would most like for there to be some separation, so they are the ones who should adopt a new moniker.
[/quote]
To be fair, Grämlins actions speak much louder than any vocal attempt at rebranding. Not only that, but the complete lack of common courtesy shown on a regular basis is disheartening to say the least; it's also partially why they alienated an entire (former) bloc.

[The Warrior]

[quote name='The Warrior' date='02 April 2010 - 04:55 PM' timestamp='1270223684' post='2245410']
We are still waiting on Ram's definition of "unconditional surrender" by the way. Can this issue, the issue that this entire thread is about, please be addressed and not given the run around any longer?
[/quote]

We are all still waiting...

[Choader]

In a means to an end sort of way what Ram and Gre are doing is defensible. Perhaps many of the alliances who entered to defend C&G are ready for peace, but no one "needs" it besides TIDT. If Gre delays the peace process by a week or two it's just that much less they'll have to rebuild with and that many more collections in anarchy or peace mode. It cuts both ways of course but the damage currently being taken by C&G and allies is too spread out to matter all that much.

Gre knows they won't get an unconditional surrender (as defined by IRON, lol), though if they believe IRON hasn't been knocked around enough as many do then this whole episode can be chalked up as a victory.

[Cormalek]

[quote name='King Chill I' date='02 April 2010 - 04:18 PM' timestamp='1270217898' post='2245324']
(...)The whole unconditional surrender thing is an idea along these lines. Its new, its interesting and its got all of your panties in a bunch. [/quote]

If that was supposed to be a rock-band metaphore, then it seems you've mistaken rocks for panties. I'd reccomend not building fortresses from the latter and not wearing the former.

Aw snap! It seems that I chewed through my gag-ball. Gonna go look for a new one, and get some batteries for my WTF?-o-meter while at it. They run out really fast lately for some reason. Must be the global radiation levels.

[Lord Curzon]

[quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' date='02 April 2010 - 08:58 AM' timestamp='1270213102' post='2245293']
Well whitepeace is a typically Grämlinish thing to do, so it might be that. At most the green ones ask folks to sell them tech. Unless i see otherwise, i am assuming, miscommunication.
[/quote]

Then you are being willfully ignorant. This is something that has been stated over and over again throughout the better part of a week.

[Golan 1st]

For some strange reason, people keep asking for a clarification of what Gramlins mean by unconditional surrender. For me, as the head of DAWN government and an ally of IRON, it means accepting in advance any demand Gramlins may make. All the rest is unimportant details.
This is not going to happen. We are not discussing it. We are not considering it. This isn't necessary. It simply does not serve us better than continuing the war with Gramlins (with or without their allies. It does not really matter at this point).
Needless to say, disarmament, so Gramlins can easily enforce those unknown terms, is out of question too.
If all Gramlins really wanted was us admitting defeat, then I believe that our agreement to [b]surrender[/b] pretty much implies that we recognize that we are not the victor in the war.
If I am mistaken in my understanding of the term "unconditional surrender", Gramlins are welcome to enlighten me.

Edited April 2, 2010 by Golan 1st

[Crymson]

[quote name='kriekfreak' date='02 April 2010 - 11:38 AM' timestamp='1270229890' post='2245502']
I'm not fixated about you, nor do I go out of my way and spent quite a bit effort to criticizing you. I comment on things I see that I feel are incorrect. Yes, you are mostly (not entirely) to blame why TOP is in this bad position right now.
[/quote]

I did make quite a few mistakes in the decisions I made in this war. Are you under some impression that I'm not admitting to those? Feel free to go ask anyone in TOP.

[quote]
And that saddens me to a great extent. I've always felt that TOP was FOK's big brother that took care of FOK when it was still in the child stages. That feeling went away with all the !@#$ you pulled and distant TOP away from FOK. My dislike in you doesn't go beyond planet Bob. I can distinguish two separate realities and act on it, unlike other persons I know.
[/quote]

Come again? We are responsible for FOK deciding to cut ties with TOP? That's not the reasoning we were given. And what was it that we pulled, exactly? As far as I've been told by members and ex-members of FOK, Tromp and UncleHarry had the elimination of ties with TOP on their agenda from the start.

It seems to me that your dislike for me does have some motive beyond CN-based criticism, as you have indeed gone out of your way to insult me and make puzzling statements about me---many of them unprovoked---on many occasions. That you do this and the hostility with which you do it suggests something more than just standard dislike. I figure that I'm just a convenient conduit for whatever it is, and I imagine you'll move on to someone else soon enough.

[quote]
I'm not sure where you got the idea that I'm comparing you with Ramirus. I'm not trying to compare you with Ramirus, I'm commenting on people that used that comparison to prove their points. Although I can see some similarities between you and Ramirus, just as I can see similarities between other leaders from other alliances. Why is that inane? I know enough (don't forget I have a lot of close friends in TOP and in the alliances you alienated). I'd say I'm more informed than the rank and vile of your own alliance. And probably have a much better and complete picture than most of the parties involved since I have several point of views.
[/quote]

You're more informed than almost anyone else in this game, eh? It seems to me that you've got a fairly high opinion of yourself.

[quote]
I hardly have to vilify you in this thread, you did most of it yourself with your own actions even a blind man could see were wrong.
[/quote]

What purpose does this statement serve?

[Tromp]

[quote name='Crymson' date='03 April 2010 - 01:57 AM' timestamp='1270252636' post='2245871']
Come again? We are responsible for FOK deciding to cut ties with TOP? That's not the reasoning we were given. And what was it that we pulled, exactly? As far as I've been told by members and ex-members of FOK, Tromp and UncleHarry had the elimination of ties with TOP on their agenda from the start.
[/quote]
Meh, would be the best response to this. Alas, I'm not interested in airing this dirty laundry in public, so I'll leave it with this.

There have been multiple reasons for this relationship ending the way it did, but no matter what happened, it was always someone else's fault right? Seriously, I think it would be fair to say a relationship ends because of friction between two parties, not because of just one.

Edited April 3, 2010 by Tromp

[Myzebedeeistaken]

[quote name='Tromp' date='03 April 2010 - 01:41 AM' timestamp='1270255274' post='2245945']
Seriously, I think it would be fair to say a relationship ends because of friction between two parties, not because of just one.
[/quote]

That's fair Tromp. I hope that we continue to be able to acknowledge our individual and collective mistakes as an alliance and in the manner in which we treat both successes and failures.

Revenons a nos moutons, I appreciate Chill spelling out publicly just why Graemlins are on their current path. It's saddening, and, even now, worrying to see our former blood brothers at the receiving end of such negative attention. I hope that they will act quickly to reverse this decision and perhaps act one final time in the way which earned them the friendship of so many.

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='02 April 2010 - 01:40 AM' timestamp='1270136383' post='2243803']
If you want to know something about GRE's demands you should put forth some effort and respectfully ask those making the policy. We have never made it our priority to explain to the cyberverse everything about us they "don't get"
[/quote]
This is hilarious.

"We demand that you disarm and surrender unconditionally, but don't expect us to explain what we actually want you to do to comply with our demand!"

[quote name='Matthew PK' date='02 April 2010 - 08:15 AM' timestamp='1270160101' post='2244419']
Remember when I was pushing for us to exit Karma and the gov (did that include you?) at the time said "We need to stay at war so that we have a right to sit at the peace talks to encourage our allies to do the right thing"
[/quote]
Do you believe that prolonging this war is the right thing to do?

Edit:

[quote name='King Chill I' date='03 April 2010 - 12:18 AM' timestamp='1270217898' post='2245324']
The whole unconditional surrender thing is an idea along these lines. Its new, its interesting and its got all of your panties in a bunch.[/quote]
Ah, I thought this was the case and said as much earlier in this thread. Throw something "new" into the works in order to sow a little confusion, prolong the war and reduce your enemies even further, without having to lift a finger. Nicely done.

Edited April 3, 2010 by Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz

[Sephiroth]

Gremlins can still merge into Citadel by recognizing me as King and I can forgive whats happened here as if it never happened.

[iamthey]

This position by gre is actually rather selfish. Gre can't do anything (NS is too high), their unwillingness to offer terms essentially just keeps their allies at war and continues to stagnate and drain them. I don't really understand what the point of holding out is, at the point where IRON/TOP could just repurchase their militaries/stay in PM if post 'unconditional surrender' negotiations fall through. Pretty much just looks like a fancy political stunt at the expense of their allies.

Of course if they abuse the good will of their allies for too long, I guess they could just be left to fend for themselves. I guess if this goes forward then you can't exactly blame IRON for whatever terms they get, as they didn't know what they were when they were accepting them...

Edited April 3, 2010 by iamthey

[Vesalius]

[quote name='Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz' date='02 April 2010 - 08:44 PM' timestamp='1270259059' post='2246064']
Ah, I thought this was the case and said as much earlier in this thread. Throw something "new" into the works in order to sow a little confusion, prolong the war and reduce your enemies even further, without having to lift a finger. Nicely done.
[/quote]
I think you've hit it spot on there. I hope so at least, as that means there's some intellectual thought behind this.

[Charles the Great]

this is very sad ......poor form.....noted for future reference.

stay strong Orange

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

[quote name='Lord Curzon' date='03 April 2010 - 02:15 AM' timestamp='1270241119' post='2245635']
Then you are being willfully ignorant. This is something that has been stated over and over again throughout the better part of a week.
[/quote]

I can see how you might come to the conclusion regards willful ignorance. However i would propose that my remarks are based on hitherto observed Grämlin decisions regarding conflict settlement and closure on Planet Bob, i.e. based on historical precedent. Add to that, my not being part of ongoing discussions and not having paid attention to the various posts regarding the so called "how far have they fallen" prior to this discussion. Indeed it was that line of commenting and references to the "fall from grace" of the Grämlins that made me sit up and take notice. I have long regarded them as one of the better entities on Planet Bob, regardless of occasional IC incompatibilities in their position and mine.

Hence I am just trying to get an idea of what really is going on. Yes, what i see here is at odds with the image conjured up by the past actions of the alliance. I hope it is not yet another disillusionment. Understand, that i have pushed for and taken reparations in the past and most likely will not change my stance on that, hence them asking for reparations is not "omg teh ebil!!!" in my opinion. Its just.. that it is not what i have come to expect from them. Plus there are other aspects that have been alluded to and commented on here, that have me a bit surprised.

If they intend to follow a new path and reinvent what they are all about, more power to them, its their prerogative as a a sovereign alliance. I would just miss what they used to be in the past. If they indeed are waving a fond farewell to their policies of long.

[kriekfreak]

[quote name='Crymson' date='03 April 2010 - 12:57 AM' timestamp='1270252636' post='2245871']
I did make quite a few mistakes in the decisions I made in this war. Are you under some impression that I'm not admitting to those? Feel free to go ask anyone in TOP.
[/quote]
It took you quite a while untill you admitted those mistakes. I'm happy you did admit those in the end, albeit far too late. Damage was already done.

[quote]Come again? We are responsible for FOK deciding to cut ties with TOP? That's not the reasoning we were given. And what was it that we pulled, exactly? [/quote]
TOP was parting away from FOK by the actions you took. FOK had no other possibility than to cut that tie since it was clear TOP was heading the opposite way as FOK. You know what you did, meddling with their affairs and threatening them before the WWE. Are you gonna spin this into something that doesn't look you as bad? Don't bother, everyone knows what happened.

[quote]As far as I've been told by members and ex-members of FOK, Tromp and UncleHarry had the elimination of ties with TOP on their agenda from the start.[/quote]
What a piece of !@#$. Tromp and UncleHarry didn't even decide to cut ties, it's the membership of FOK that decided to cut ties with you. They have the final vote.

[quote]It seems to me that your dislike for me does have some motive beyond CN-based criticism, as you have indeed gone out of your way to insult me and make puzzling statements about me---many of them unprovoked---on many occasions. That you do this and the hostility with which you do it suggests something more than just standard dislike. I figure that I'm just a convenient conduit for whatever it is, and I imagine you'll move on to someone else soon enough. [/quote]

Oh I do dislike you Crymson. As said before, you pulled quite a lot of crap that TOP is now paying for. I hope that FOK and TOP can restore the relationship once more, but I doubt it will as long as you are there.

[quote]You're more informed than almost anyone else in this game, eh? It seems to me that you've got a fairly high opinion of yourself.[/quote]
I'm not saying that I'm more informed than almost anyone, I'm saying I'm more informed than your rank and vile. Stop putting words in my mouth to disregard what I say.

[Bob Janova]

[quote]However i would propose that my remarks are based on hitherto observed Grämlin decisions regarding conflict settlement and closure on Planet Bob, i.e. based on historical precedent.[/quote]
That's rather the point – this is not the same alliance as the one which you are looking into history at. Yes, this stance is entirely out of keeping with Grämlins' history – about the only Grämlins principle they're adhering to is not to let external forces dictate what is 'acceptable', but the way that's been twisted into justification for oppression when its purpose was to resist the political monoculture of the Initiative is sickening.

[Tautology]

It's frustrating how many discussions turn into one group justifying an opinion by saying an alliance is the same as it used to be, while another group justifies a different opinion by saying that the alliance isn't the same as it used to be. The answer to the question, "How much has the alliance changed?" is so subjective that it precludes an interesting or entertaining exchange of views and only encourages polarization.

[Thorgrum]

[quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' date='03 April 2010 - 09:00 AM' timestamp='1270281618' post='2246398']
I can see how you might come to the conclusion regards willful ignorance. However i would propose that my remarks are based on hitherto observed Grämlin decisions regarding conflict settlement and closure on Planet Bob, i.e. based on historical precedent. [/quote]

Bob summed it up pretty well Alfred. Historic precedent really doesn’t apply here anymore, and yes that includes people belly aching about what gramlins used to be. Anyone who is surprised, shocked or dismayed by any thing from Gramlins has very little understanding of the nature of how that alliance works. I for one respect and admire their desire and ability to operate under their own terms in all matters. What is lost in the outward expressions of people here is the understanding that the elements within gramlins that actually make decisions ( a very small cabal of people) do not attempt to view the world through any other perspective other then the immediate gratification of personal pleasure at that particular moment.

Not necessarily a bad thing put in the context of why we are all here [OOC: It’s a game OOC:] but historic references applied to current gramlins is a waste of time. Don’t be fooled by the whining of prior members, they, like myself should know better than to expect conventional approaches to mechanisms that have historic precedents (terms, surrender, etc). Those who were there know, they are run primarily by a megalomaniac. I for one have a great deal of respect for what he has been able to achieve. It takes a lot of dedication to tear down a once great alliance and mold it into the vision that nurtures your ego, it’s actually a very interesting aside to the larger story of our dear planet.

Edited April 3, 2010 by Thorgrum